From the Editors of the Wall Street Journal:  NATO has had many impressive moments in its history, but its misadventure in Libya isn’t one of them. Moammar Gadhafi and his mercenaries may be no military match for NATO’s jets and cruise missiles, but at every turn the alliance has acted in a way that has given the dictator hope of surviving.

In the latest example, the French and British last week floated a unilateral concession: Gadhafi can stay in Libya, as long as he renounces any claim on holding power. This is a major retreat from NATO’s earlier position that Gadhafi had to leave Libya. . . .

The U.S. and Italians quickly endorsed this idea, saying that whatever the Libyans decide was fine by them. . . .

The new concession to Gadhafi is also a signal of how eager the allies are to stop this campaign only five months after it began. President Obama ended any significant American role as early as April 7 and now rarely mentions Libya or Gadhafi. The allies have flown only a third as many sorties over Libya as they did against Serbia in the 1999 Kosovo war in the same amount of time, and they’ve hit a far smaller share of targets. Some countries are running out of ammunition. . . .

NATO still might win in Libya, despite itself, but the episode shows what happens when America fails to lead. No one else has the means or the will to see a war through to its end. The alliance intervened to free Libyans from Gadhafi and his murderous clan and provide a chance to build a better country. Any outcome that leaves the Gadhafis with a say over all or part of Libya will count as NATO’s first defeat.  (photo: Reuters)

Image: reuter%208%202%2011%20pro%20Gaddafi.jpg